I love pushing ultralight boundaries as much as anyone, but the drawbacks are real. Obviously, a million variables exist, but if punching tags is the goal, lightweight guns are often a liability. Total weight in the 7- to 9-pound range merges shootability with easy carry. Go below that, and they're trickier to shoot. Go above that, and they become harder to pack.
On the once-in-a-lifetime Idaho sheep hunt I hope to someday draw, I'd use a 10-pound rifle. Carrying it would suck, but if/when an opportunity occurred, I could shoot to the best of my abilities.
Over the years, a few have vehemently disagreed with my posts. I expected that before pressing the Post button. With merit on both sides of the discussion - we'll just agree to disagree.
Once again, I know my opinion here will agree with a few, but probably not the many. So, here goes.....
My humble / experienced opinion, FWIW: Unquestionably and rightfully so, hunts in very high elevations, every ounce matters in the total gear / rifle weight being carried.
For the other 90% of hunting situations...a few points to consider:
1. Another pound or three in the rifle will noticeably reduce "felt" recoil - and especially with 7 Rem Mag, 30-06, 300 Win mag and similar cartridges in light weight rifles often carried into upper altitudes. A joy to carry? Absolutely. To shoot "accurately?"
2. Proven countless times - not always mind you - extra weight in a rifle typically improves both "rifle and shooter" accuracy. Referring to the countless words written and spoken to the critical importance of bullet "placement."
3. Spoken from long experience - taking a serious approach to getting in shape minimizes the work it takes to haul stuff into / up / and all over the mountains. Those out of shape who find themselves in the middle of that - quickly learn the lesson. For some, reducing gear / rifle weight is the answer. Likely so. See # 1 and # 2 above. If you can handle that and maintain your accuracy - good on you. Me personally - I've always felt getting in shape to "comfortably" carry a heavier rifle - which I do - always took priority - maintaining my accuracy when it came time to pull the trigger. YMMV.
JM2CW.
Cheers.
I generally agree. I will add something: the stock geometry and rifle balance are very important, that’s something i learned the hard way.
Everything depends on the applications in my opinion. If you plan to shoot long distance (or you need extra accurate shot placement because targets are small, like in my case hunting mostly small 50 pounds roe deer), you get a lot of benefits from a bit heavier rifle.. for example, with a 308 with not too fast loads, around 9 pounds is ideal of you still and shoot up to 300 yards or so. If the shot starts to get to 350-450 yards, with a small target, even a 9 pounds rifle is less forgiving on positional changes.
That said, i had issues (leaving to my only miss while hunting until now) with a 11 pound rifle and a hot 308 load not because of the recoil but because of the geometry of the stock: a stock with low buttstock tends to make the rifle jump much more. The CF mcs-t i had on the rifle was making it pretty impossible to control the recoil, and when shots were taken from a slightly different position/angle, especially uphill, they ended up high by even two MOA. That thing recoiled brutally even being just a 308, i never managed to have it recoil straight back once. Until i had it recoil in the same way (never “straight”), it was extremely accurate, even changing positions between bipod and bench at the range, merging more or less 40 shots from different groups from the first 10 shots of every range sesssions, i didn’t see a single bullet going outside a .8 MOA circle in the middle of the POA and 5 shot individual groups were basically a rugged hole, but the consistency of POI in field positions proved to be poor.
So i understood that for those kind of shots you need a stock with a buttpad closer to the line of recoil (the bore), in order to have more margin of error.
Recently i talked with a very good stock builder, who makes ultralight adjustable cheekpiece carbon fiber stocks with an amazing reputation and he told me that, more than the weight itself, which obviously helps, what matters the most is the balance. Not so much the front-rear balance but more the top down one. For example, a heavy stock with a light scope could give recoil control issues in his opinion.
This was very interesting to hear
What do you guys think?
